President Nana Akufo-Addo has dismissed a petition filed for the removal of Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkornoo.
The President’s decision follows an advice from the Council of State pursuant to the provisions of Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution.
The Council concluded firmly that the petition for the removal of the Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, does not disclose any facts of wrongdoing and, therefore, no prima facie case had been made upon which the Council could make a recommendation for an investigation to be conducted.
Read full statement from the Presidency below:
RE: PETITION FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA, HER LADYSHIP GERTRUDE SACKEY TORKORNOO PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTTCLE 146 OF THE 1992 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA
DETERMINATION OF PRIMA FACIE CASE
[…]
The Council of State, in its letter, dated 2nd January, 2025, conveying its conclusions on the consultation with me on the petition, observed that the Petitioner did not seem to have a clear understanding of the laws and rules governing the administration of justice and the peculiar role and powers given to the Chief Justice for the proper administration of the judicial service. The Council concluded firmly that the petition for the removal of the Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, does not disclose any facts of wrongdoing and, therefore, no prima facie case had been made upon which the Council could make a recommendation for an investigation to be conducted. The Council advised me to dismiss the petition as being frivolous and vexatious.
On the strength of all of the above, I find that no prima facie case is disclosed by the instant petition for the removal of the Chief lustice. The petition is devoid of any basis warranting the setting up of a committee under article 146 (6). To entertain further proceedings on the basis of conjecture, speculation and misunderstanding of legal principles and well-established practices, as the petition is replete with, will violate
legally acceptable standards of fairness.
Date-Bah JSC, author of the lead judgment in Agyei-Twum v’ Attorney-General and Akwettey (supra), on the issue of the handling of petitions which do not meet the threshold of article 146, expressed himself thus:
‘…Once any petition, no matter how frivolous its contents are, is presented to the President, then he has a duty to establish a committee to consider it. A literal reading of the provision, therefore, could lead to the floodgates being opened for frivolous and vexatious petitions being continuously filed against a serving Chief Justice, with two Supreme Court judges being perpetually tied down to hearing such petitions, alongside the other membes of the committee that the President has to appoint. This is a scenario that would weaken the efficacy of the top echelon of the Judiciary.’
It is obvious from the above that the Supreme Court, in interpreting article 146 (6), had in mind unmeritorious and unwarranted petitions such as the instant one. The petition is dismissed accordingly.
[signed]
NANA ADDO DANKWA AKUFO-ADDO
PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC